Wednesday, March 9, 2016

WEST MT. AIRY, PHILADELPHIA PA - RESIDENTS SAY THEY ARE FRUSTRATED BY INACTION FROM AUTHORITIES TO ENFORCE THE LAW AFTER 2 PIT BULLS BIT 3 PEOPLE AND ATTACKED 4 DOGS IN UNPROVOKED ATTACKS

(CBS) – Pit bull attacks in a West Mt. Airy neighborhood has residents running out of patience.

Residents claim a neighbor’s TWO PIT BULLS bit three people and four dogs in unprovoked attacks on the victim’s property.

Residents say the most recent attack, on February 11, fueled them to mobilize fearing the next victim could be a child. According to residents after this attack, the owner was spotted unleashing the dogs in a shared back alley way.

Despite numerous attacks, residents say authorities as well as the dog’s owners have failed to take action. Residents say this is in violation of a citation issued by the Animal Care and Control Team last year requiring the dogs be on leashes and muzzled.

On Tuesday the group will hold a community meeting about the inaction at the Germantown Home-New Courtland TR room.

Residents say they are frustrated by inaction from authorities to enforce the law despite following recommendations to document incidents and contact the police and ACCT. The police and ACCT, on the other hand, say they are powerless.

“We are seeking a police officer or Sargent willing to file a complaint before a district judge so that the victims and neighbors may present their testimony before a judge/magistrate, providing evidence that this homeowner harbors dangerous dogs,” says resident Michelle Nashleanas, whose dog was bitten in 2013.

On Thursday night, Police Commissioner Richard Ross visited Mt. Airy, and after hearing the stories, vowed action, according to residents.

As well the following should be labeled as Dangerous dogs after single bite incident: rottweilers, chow chows, Doberman pinschers, German shepherds, they as well as all Grandfathered Pit Bull Type Dogs must be:

* Licensed

* Micro-chipped with any bite history in database for reference.

* Insured: All dogs must be covered by mandatory liability insurance of $100,000 min. generic and $500,000 after a skin breaking bite with insurance companies based on actuarial statistic's determining said rate.

* All breeds involved in any bite incident and Grandfathered Pit Bull Type Dogs must be kenneled in a locked five-sided enclosure with concrete bottom.

For all other dog owners language can be written that enclosure such as fences must be capable of containing your dog period, such generic language puts the onus on the owner, have the fines be so onerous that said owner will ensure this they make this so.

1,000 the first time, double the second time and permanent confiscation the third time with a ban on said person from owning any dog within city limits, this will create an effective outcome directly or indirectly.

* All dogs must be on leashes outside of home enclosure

* All Grandfathered Pit Bull Type Dogs must also be muzzled outside of home enclosure

* No transport of declared dangerous dogs for the purpose of re-homing. (Dangerous dogs must be dealt with where their history is known.)

* All of the rules listed above also apply to rescues: rescued dogs must be licensed and subject to inspection.

$1,000 fine for noncompliance

Elimination of the one-bite rule in all of the 50 U.S. statesManslaughter charges for owner of dog that kills a humanFelony charge for owner of dog that mauls human, dog, or other domestic animal.

THE CODE OF ALABAMA - 1975

Title: 6 CIVIL PRACTICE

Section 6-5-120

Defined.

A "nuisance" is anything that works hurt, inconvenience or damage to another. The fact that the act done may otherwise be lawful does not keep it from being a nuisance. The inconvenience complained of must not be fanciful or such as would affect only one of a fastidious taste, but it should be such as would affect an ordinary reasonable man.

(Code 1907, §5193; Code 1923, §9271; Code 1940, T. 7, §1081

Section 6-5-121

_____________________

Distinction between public and private nuisances; right of action generally.

Nuisances are either public or private. A public nuisance is one which damages all persons who come within the sphere of its operation, though it may vary in its effects on individuals. A private nuisance is one limited in its injurious effects to one or a few individuals. Generally, a public nuisance gives no right of action to any individual, but must be abated by a process instituted in the name of the state. A private nuisance gives a right of action to the person injured.

Use of force in defense of a person.

(a) A person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he or she may use a degree of force which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary for the purpose. A person may use deadly physical force, and is legally presumed to be justified in using deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another person pursuant to subdivision (4), if the person reasonably believes that another person is:

(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.

(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling.

(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.

(4) In the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is in the process of sabotaging or attempting to sabotage a federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is attempting to remove, or has forcefully removed, a person against his or her will from any dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle when the person has a legal right to be there, and provided that the person using the deadly physical force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring. The legal presumption that a person using deadly physical force is justified to do so pursuant to this subdivision does not apply if:

a. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner or lessee, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person;

b. The person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used;

c. The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

d. The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his or her official duties.

(b) A person who is justified under subsection (a) in using physical force, including deadly physical force, and who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and is in any place where he or she has the right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a person is not justified in using physical force if:

(1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, he or she provoked the use of unlawful physical force by such other person.

(2) He or she was the initial aggressor, except that his or her use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he or she withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his or her intent to do so, but the latter person nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force.

(3) The physical force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.

(d) A person who uses force, including deadly physical force, as justified and permitted in this section is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the force was determined to be unlawful.

(e) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force described in subsection (a), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.